Search

Purpose: To evaluate the influence of a previous caesarean section on adverse composite maternal and perinatal outcome in women who attempted a trial of labor.This historical cohort study analyzed maternal and perinatal outcome in women with otherwise low risk pregnancies at term who underwent a trial of labor after a caesarean section (TOLAC). The primary outcome measure was the adverse composite outcome. Secondary outcome measures were amongst others the caesarean section rate and the mode of vaginal delivery.The adverse composite outcome was more frequently in the previous caesarean section group compared to women with no previous caesarean Sect. (22.3% vs. 15.6%, p < 0.0001). The percentage of caesarean Sect. (15.4% vs. 8.2%, p < 0,0001), uterine rupture (1.0% vs. 0.02%, p < 0.0001), placental abruption (1.1% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.0014), vaginal operative delivery (16.0% vs. 8.6%, p < 0.0001), pH < 7.10 (3.7% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.0151), base excess < -12 (3.2% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.0297), abnormal cardiotocography (22.5% vs. 13.9%, p < 0,0001) and fetal blood analysis (6.2% vs. 2.6%, p < 0.0001) was significantly higher in women with a previous caesarean section. Taking the parity into account, these differences could only been seen in women without a previous vaginal delivery. In parous women with a previous vaginal delivery and a caesarean section in history, the adverse composite did not differ between the groups. Only the rate of pH < 7.1 was higher in women after a caesarean Sect. (4.5% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.0436).Trial of labor after caesarean in otherwise low risk pregnancies is associated with a higher rate of complications especially if there is no history of vaginal delivery.Methods: To evaluate the influence of a previous caesarean section on adverse composite maternal and perinatal outcome in women who attempted a trial of labor.This historical cohort study analyzed maternal and perinatal outcome in women with otherwise low risk pregnancies at term who underwent a trial of labor after a caesarean section (TOLAC). The primary outcome measure was the adverse composite outcome. Secondary outcome measures were amongst others the caesarean section rate and the mode of vaginal delivery.The adverse composite outcome was more frequently in the previous caesarean section group compared to women with no previous caesarean Sect. (22.3% vs. 15.6%, p < 0.0001). The percentage of caesarean Sect. (15.4% vs. 8.2%, p < 0,0001), uterine rupture (1.0% vs. 0.02%, p < 0.0001), placental abruption (1.1% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.0014), vaginal operative delivery (16.0% vs. 8.6%, p < 0.0001), pH < 7.10 (3.7% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.0151), base excess < -12 (3.2% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.0297), abnormal cardiotocography (22.5% vs. 13.9%, p < 0,0001) and fetal blood analysis (6.2% vs. 2.6%, p < 0.0001) was significantly higher in women with a previous caesarean section. Taking the parity into account, these differences could only been seen in women without a previous vaginal delivery. In parous women with a previous vaginal delivery and a caesarean section in history, the adverse composite did not differ between the groups. Only the rate of pH < 7.1 was higher in women after a caesarean Sect. (4.5% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.0436).Trial of labor after caesarean in otherwise low risk pregnancies is associated with a higher rate of complications especially if there is no history of vaginal delivery.Results: To evaluate the influence of a previous caesarean section on adverse composite maternal and perinatal outcome in women who attempted a trial of labor.This historical cohort study analyzed maternal and perinatal outcome in women with otherwise low risk pregnancies at term who underwent a trial of labor after a caesarean section (TOLAC). The primary outcome measure was the adverse composite outcome. Secondary outcome measures were amongst others the caesarean section rate and the mode of vaginal delivery.The adverse composite outcome was more frequently in the previous caesarean section group compared to women with no previous caesarean Sect. (22.3% vs. 15.6%, p < 0.0001). The percentage of caesarean Sect. (15.4% vs. 8.2%, p < 0,0001), uterine rupture (1.0% vs. 0.02%, p < 0.0001), placental abruption (1.1% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.0014), vaginal operative delivery (16.0% vs. 8.6%, p < 0.0001), pH < 7.10 (3.7% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.0151), base excess < -12 (3.2% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.0297), abnormal cardiotocography (22.5% vs. 13.9%, p < 0,0001) and fetal blood analysis (6.2% vs. 2.6%, p < 0.0001) was significantly higher in women with a previous caesarean section. Taking the parity into account, these differences could only been seen in women without a previous vaginal delivery. In parous women with a previous vaginal delivery and a caesarean section in history, the adverse composite did not differ between the groups. Only the rate of pH < 7.1 was higher in women after a caesarean Sect. (4.5% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.0436).Trial of labor after caesarean in otherwise low risk pregnancies is associated with a higher rate of complications especially if there is no history of vaginal delivery.Conclusion: To evaluate the influence of a previous caesarean section on adverse composite maternal and perinatal outcome in women who attempted a trial of labor.This historical cohort study analyzed maternal and perinatal outcome in women with otherwise low risk pregnancies at term who underwent a trial of labor after a caesarean section (TOLAC). The primary outcome measure was the adverse composite outcome. Secondary outcome measures were amongst others the caesarean section rate and the mode of vaginal delivery.The adverse composite outcome was more frequently in the previous caesarean section group compared to women with no previous caesarean Sect. (22.3% vs. 15.6%, p < 0.0001). The percentage of caesarean Sect. (15.4% vs. 8.2%, p < 0,0001), uterine rupture (1.0% vs. 0.02%, p < 0.0001), placental abruption (1.1% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.0014), vaginal operative delivery (16.0% vs. 8.6%, p < 0.0001), pH < 7.10 (3.7% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.0151), base excess < -12 (3.2% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.0297), abnormal cardiotocography (22.5% vs. 13.9%, p < 0,0001) and fetal blood analysis (6.2% vs. 2.6%, p < 0.0001) was significantly higher in women with a previous caesarean section. Taking the parity into account, these differences could only been seen in women without a previous vaginal delivery. In parous women with a previous vaginal delivery and a caesarean section in history, the adverse composite did not differ between the groups. Only the rate of pH < 7.1 was higher in women after a caesarean Sect. (4.5% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.0436).Trial of labor after caesarean in otherwise low risk pregnancies is associated with a higher rate of complications especially if there is no history of vaginal delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To determine the rates of trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC) and complications in Japan.Methods: We conducted a descriptive study of pregnant women with one prior cesarean section registered between January 2013 and December 2015 in the perinatal database of the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology. This database is a nationwide institution-based registry in Japan. This study included women who had undergone one prior cesarean delivery and who delivered a singleton by cephalic presentation between 37 and 41 weeks of gestation. We collected data on delivery method, particularly with regard to the involvement of TOLAC or elective repeated cesarean deliveries (ERCD). Rates of TOLAC were investigated by facility type, and we calculated the rates of maternal and perinatal complications including uterine rupture in TOLAC.Results: During the study period, 647,098 births were registered. Among the 34,460 women who met the inclusion criteria, 1730 (5.0%) and 32,730 (95.0%) underwent TOLAC and ERCD, respectively. In total, 76.4% of hospitals did not perform TOLAC at all. Generally in perinatal medical centers, which are better equipped with facilities, 58.7% women did not perform TOLAC. With regard to complications, we identified eight cases (0.46%) of uterine rupture with TOLAC. TOLAC births did not include maternal death and perinatal death. Among women attempting TOLAC, 1532 (88.6%) had successful vaginal births.Conclusion: The TOLAC rate in Japan was considerably lower than that reported in other countries, despite comparable complication rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) is an option to avoid major abdominal surgery and many consequences related to repeated caesarean delivery. In the last years, many efforts have been made to increase the number of patients attempting trial of labour after caesarean (TOLAC). The aim of our study was to identify the most important factors associated with the success of VBAC.Methods: A retrospective study was conducted in two Italian referral centres. Subjects included were singleton and morphologically normal pregnancy with previous C-section. Subjects with an inter-pregnancy interval shorter than 18 months, a large for gestational age baby, a pregnancy complicated with gestational diabetes and a previous unclassified uterine scar were excluded. The characteristics of the subjects were compared and a logistic regression was performed to evaluate variables associated with successful VBAC.Results: Of the 300 patients included, 224 (74.7%) achieved VBAC while 76 (25.3%) underwent C-section after failed TOLAC. The number of previous C-sections was not significantly associated with the success of TOLAC. Factors positively associated with achievement of VBAC were previous vaginal delivery (OR of 6.88 for one and 9.68 for more than one) and oxytocin implementation (OR 3.32). No maternal and neonatal adverse events occurred.Conclusion: Our results show that attempting VBAC is a feasible option in referral centres after adequate evaluation of the potential factors affecting the probability of success. A careful record of obstetrical history and management of labour can provide clinicians useful information to counsel women before and during labour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the maternal and neonatal morbidity outcome associated with vacuum assisted (VA) vaginal delivery at first vaginal birth following a previous cesarean delivery (CD).Study Design: This is a retrospective computerized study conducted at a single tertiary center, between 2005 and 2018. The study compared the morbidity outcome of VA vaginal delivery between two groups of parturients at their first vaginal birth; primigravid and those in second delivery with a prior cesarean. The primary outcome was the maternal adverse outcome: postpartum hemorrhage (PPH), anal sphincter injuries, retained placenta, shoulder dystocia, uterine rupture, and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. Secondary outcome was the neonatal adverse outcome: Apgar score, NICU admission, meconium aspiration, jaundice, sepsis, birth trauma, and death. Univariate analysis was followed by a multiple logistic regression model controlling for potential confounders, adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence interval).Results: During the study period, we identified 3695 parturients that engaged in Trial of labor after cesarean with no previous vaginal birth, among which 679 (18.4%) delivered by Vacuum (VA-VBAC). These were compared to 6544/43,083 (15.2%) primigravid delivered by Vacuum. The VA-VBAC group had higher risk of PPH (10.5% vs. 7.2%, p < 0.01), blood transfusions (5.6% vs. 3.5%, p < 0.01), retained placenta (10.2% vs. 4.7%, p < 0.01), and uterine rupture (0.4% vs. 0%, p < 0.01). The adverse neonatal outcomes were comparable among groups.Conclusion: The VA-VBAC has a higher risk of maternal postpartum hemorrhagic complications; preventive measures should be directed to this selected group of operative vaginal deliveries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Normal labor curves have not been assessed for women undergoing a trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC). This study examined labor patterns during TOLAC in relation to epidural analgesia use.Methods: Retrospective cohort study of deliveries of women undergoing TOLAC at a single, academic, tertiary medical center. Length of first, second and third stages of labor was compared between 424 women undergoing TOLAC in the current labor with no previous vaginal delivery (VD) and 357 women with at least one previous VD and current TOLAC.Results: Women in the TOLAC only group had significantly longer labors compared to women in the previous VD and TOLAC group. In both groups, women who underwent epidural analgesia had longer first and second stages of labor. In the TOLAC only group, more women who had epidural analgesia tended to deliver vaginally as compared to those who did not (P = 0.09). For women who delivered vaginally, the 95th percentile for the second stage duration with epidural was 3.40 h in the TOLAC only group and 2.3 h in the previous VD and TOLAC group. The 95th percentile for the second stage duration without epidural was 1.4 h in the TOLAC only group and 0.9 h in the previous VD and TOLAC group.Conclusions: Operative intervention (instrumental delivery/cesarean delivery (CD)) might be considered for women attempting TOLAC after a 2-h duration of second stage without epidural and 3-h duration with epidural, with an hour less for women who also had previous VD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The purpose of this study was: (A) to establish the effects of different ultrasound measurement methods (linear versus curved array) and measuring conditions [impact of pressure by fetal head/pelvis on the lower uterine segment (LUS)] during LUS-muscular-thickness measurement, (B) to introduce the intraoperative ultrasound measurement of LUS-muscular thickness (reference measurement method), and (C) to evaluate the correlation between different combinations of LUS-muscular-thickness measurement ultrasound techniques at birth planning and preoperative versus intraoperative measurements.Methods: A prospective clinical observational study of women with the previous cesarean delivery was conducted. LUS-muscular thickness was measured: first at birth planning and second preoperatively using linear and curved probes (transabdominal) and an endocavitar probe (transvaginal), examined with and without pressure by fetal head/pelvis on LUS during measurement and third intraoperatively during repeat cesarean. Bland-Altman plots, paired t tests, Pearson's correlation coefficient, and scatter plots were used.Results: Thirty-three women were included in the study (ultrasound measurements: n = 601). There was no systematic difference between LUS-muscular-thickness measurements with linear versus curved array (mean difference = 0.06 mm; p = 0.24; nm = 133) but between measurements with pressure by the fetus versus without (mean difference = - 0.37 mm; p < 0.001; nm = 243). The highest correlation coefficients were detected for the preoperative (at the day of cesarean section), transabdominal-vaginal approach combined ultrasound measurements versus the intraoperative ultrasound measurements of LUS-muscular thickness-as long as the measurements were made without pressure from the fetal head/pelvis on the LUS [0.86, p < 0.001, n = 24, 95% CI (0.70, 0.94)].Conclusions: The systematic application of predetermined measuring conditions, standardized setup criteria improves the performance of LUS thickness measurement by ultrasound near term. CLINICALTRIALS.Gov Identifier: NCT02827604. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate whether cesarean delivery (CD) indication, labor status, and other primary CD characteristics affect the risk for uterine rupture in subsequent deliveries.Methods: A case-control study of women attempting trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) in a single, tertiary, university-affiliated medical center (2007-2016). Deliveries complicated by uterine rupture were matched to successful vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) deliveries in a 1:3 ratio. Indication, labor status and post-partum complications (postpartum hemorrhage and postpartum infection) at primary CD were compared between study and control group.Results: During study period, there were 75,682 deliveries, of them, 3937 (5.2%) were TOLAC. Study group included 53 cases of uterine rupture at TOLAC and 159 women with successful VBAC. Women in study group had significantly lower rates of previous VBAC (15.1 vs. 28.9%, p = 0.047). Rate of postpartum complications at primary CD was significantly higher in women with TOLAC complicated by uterine rupture (7.5 vs. 1.9%, respectively, p = 0.042). Utilizing the multivariate logistic regression analysis, postpartum complications remained an independent risk factor for uterine rupture in the following TOLAC (aOR 4.07, 95% CI 1.14-14.58, p = 0.031).Conclusion: Postpartum hemorrhage and infection, in primary CD, seem to be associated with increased risk for uterine rupture during subsequent TOLAC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To determine the risk of uterine rupture for women undergoing trial of labour (TOL) with both a prior caesarean section (CS) and a vaginal delivery.Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using keywords for CS and uterine rupture. The results were critically appraised and the data from relevant and valid articles were extracted. Odds ratios were calculated and a pooled estimate was determined using the Mantel-Haenszel method.Results: Five studies were used for final analysis. Three studies showed a significant risk reduction for women with both a previous CS and a prior vaginal delivery (PVD) compared to women with a previous CS only, and two studies showed a trend towards risk reduction. The absolute risk of uterine rupture with a prior vaginal delivery varied from 0.17 to 0.46%. The overall odds ratio for PVD was 0.39 (95% CI 0.29-0.52, P < 0.00001).Conclusion: Women with a history of both a CS and vaginal delivery are at decreased risk of uterine rupture when undergoing TOL compared with women who have only had a CS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rate of vaginal birth after a cesarean (VBAC) delivery in the multiparous population has decreased largely in recent years because of maternal and neonatal complications. The clinical management of grand multiparous (GMP) women (>5 births) with a prior cesarean delivery is even less clear. The purpose of the present study was to assess the risks of maternal and neonatal complications associated with VBAC compared to that of repeated elective cesarean section (CS) in the GMP population. A retrospective study of 1,102 GMP women with a singleton gestation and a prior single CS was conducted. Data were retrieved from the database of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the Soroka University Medical Center, Beer Sheva, Israel. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared between women who underwent a successful VBAC attempt, women who had failed in a trial of labor and women who had an elective repeated CS. Six hundred and nineteen women (56%) underwent a successful VBAC, 155 (14%) underwent a trail of labor and 328 (30%) had an elective repeated CS. Women who had a successful VBAC required less blood transfusion, and had less puerperal fever diseases ( P < 0.001). Induction or augmentation of labor was associated with failure of VBAC ( P < 0.001). No significant differences in neonatal complications were observed between the groups. No significant difference in uterine dehiscence, uterine rupture, amnionitis, postpartum hemorrhage, hysterectomy, puerperal fever and thromboembolic diseases was observed between the groups. A successful VBAC in the GMP population was not associated with a higher risk of maternal complications in comparison with a repeated elective CS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Normal labor curves have not been assessed for women undergoing a trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC). This study examined labor patterns during TOLAC in relation to epidural analgesia use.Methods: Retrospective cohort study of deliveries of women undergoing TOLAC at a single, academic, tertiary medical center. Length of first, second and third stages of labor was compared between 424 women undergoing TOLAC in the current labor with no previous vaginal delivery (VD) and 357 women with at least one previous VD and current TOLAC.Results: Women in the TOLAC only group had significantly longer labors compared to women in the previous VD and TOLAC group. In both groups, women who underwent epidural analgesia had longer first and second stages of labor. In the TOLAC only group, more women who had epidural analgesia tended to deliver vaginally as compared to those who did not (P = 0.09). For women who delivered vaginally, the 95th percentile for the second stage duration with epidural was 3.40 h in the TOLAC only group and 2.3 h in the previous VD and TOLAC group. The 95th percentile for the second stage duration without epidural was 1.4 h in the TOLAC only group and 0.9 h in the previous VD and TOLAC group.Conclusions: Operative intervention (instrumental delivery/cesarean delivery (CD)) might be considered for women attempting TOLAC after a 2-h duration of second stage without epidural and 3-h duration with epidural, with an hour less for women who also had previous VD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]